10.29.09
Stardust
So many stars have died, exploding their dust across the universe, finding homes on planets such as ours. We, are literally the dust of many stars that have mixed into a variety of shapes, evolving from one form into another over millions of years.
One form we hold close to our hearts, among the many passing forms of stardust, is a form we call “life”.
We can be myth-makers, personifying death as a thief, a thief that will soon be met with justice, our lives returned to us once again. Or we can see ourselves as stardust, changing its form from one with life into another without.
Once the game is over, the King and the pawn go back in the same box.
Italian Proverb
10.27.09
Mother Nature and Father Time
Check out this video on what kind of “God” cannot logically exist…
I remember when I wrote about these ideas sometime ago in my novel-in-progress. The end result was, however it came to be, that I couldn’t think of “God” (I was a christian at the time) as being the creator of all things ex nihilo (out of nothing), but rather the creator of all things in the sense that he/she worked with material already existing. So, “God” to me was a “God” that could NEVER have been “omni-present”, nor “omni-potent” (unless whatever is, logically, the most powerful being ever to exist could be called “omni-potent”).
These changes in my theology also included a limitation of “God’s” knowledge. I couldn’t see “God” as a supreme being living outside of time. And assuming time is never without an end, it was impossible for me to picture “God” with the ability to know the future. And so, my novel-writing process led me to re-interpret my theology into one of many “Open Theist” interpretations.
I never even considered the fact that I had stepped into a “liberal” understanding of christianity (though I had yet to see the bible as a strictly human artifact) . From my perspective, I was only trying to see God in a logical manner because I assumed he/she thought of him or herself as logical. Even when I started reading Brian Mclaren’s books while entering into the “Emerging Church” scene, I never realized that I had liberal leanings in my christian faith. Looking back, I can see now that I could have easily labeled myself a Liberal Christian much earlier than I did – which was right after I left the church for good.
10.21.09
Excerpts From An Apostate’s Letter To Family
Dr. Sagan’s quote, that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” seems to fit in here and is the sole reason why I no longer believe in a literal interpretation of the Genesis creation story, or that Earth ever experienced a global flood, or that the sun stood still in the sky, or that the Israelites wandered in the desert for forty years. There is not just a lack of evidence, but evidence to the contrary. And, as it follows, if the material claims of the Bible can not be substantiated, how am I supposed to take the spiritual claims seriously?
…Do you entertain the claims made by Mormons or Muslims or Moonies? You do not. Because there is no reason to. When you (rightly) ignore the empty claims made by other religions it is because they do not pass through the filters of reason set up by your prefrontal cortex. Of course, these other religions make the same exception you do about their inability to give evidence for their claims. You must, they say, on faith accept that Mohammad ascended into the sky on a winged horse, or that Native Americans are descendants of Israel or that Sun Myung Moon is the Messiah. Unsurprisingly, you don’t accept these absurd claims. And you shouldn’t. But consider for a moment the claims made by Christianity in light of the same standard you set for evaluating the claims made by other religions.
When you determine that the Catholic claim of immaculate conception is ridiculous, you are using reason. When you determine that the Pentecostal practice of glossolalia is useless, you are using reason. When you conclude that the Lutheran latching-on of the doctrine of infant baptism is absurd, you are using reason. How is it that the beliefs you hold are exempt from this same kind of rational scrutiny? Before you’re tempted to retreat from the question by responding, “I am able to discern truth because the Holy Spirit guides me”, consider the probability that, of all of the 38,000 different denominations within Christianity alone and of all the different beliefs, that your particular portfolio of beliefs are all of the correct ones.
Isn’t it time we recognize reason as a gift and begin subjecting our own beliefs to the same scrutiny and criticism that we use in every other area of our lives? (bold mine)
09.29.09
Stephen Fry on the “Divine Fire” and Human Imagination
I feel like I’ve been posting far too many youtubes on my blog, but I also feel that it would be wrong not to post them. Here, again, is another youtube, and it has made my copy of Shelley’s Frankenstein call out to me for another read. I can’t remember how many times I’ve read this favorite among favorites of mine because it’s been so long since I’ve touched it last. And I’m afraid it will be some time longer before I get to it again.
07.25.09
Concrete Morality
“Do you believe there is absolute morality?”
You gotta love this question, because if you say ‘no’ then it is easily assumed that you believe morality is conditional, flawed, and therefore, you have no solid ground to stand on when deciding what you think is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’? Some may go so far as to assume you lack any true standards.
It’s true that there is little to nothing that I “believe” in. However, there are many things or ideas that I accept. (You know, it’s strange that these words, ‘believe’ and ‘absolute’, can be held onto so tight by many of those who get upset when you assume them to be “Fundamentalists”. Huh!)
For those interested, I don’t believe absolute morality exists but I accept the idea that concrete morality does. The literal definition of ‘concrete’ means “to grow together”. As an adjective it can be used to define things as ‘particular’, ‘real’, ‘actual’, ‘tangible’ rather than abstract. As a noun it can be used metaphorically..
an artificial, stonelike material used for various structural purposes, made by mixing cement and various aggregates, as sand, pebbles, gravel, or shale, with water and allowing the mixture to harden. via
I like ‘artificial’ in the sense that it emphasizes that morality is human made. I like ’stonelike’ in the sense that morality is capable of providing tangible stability. And I like ‘various aggregates’ in the sense that what’s made is made out of diversity.
Morality, to me, is the result of a collective growing together, whether it be intentional or unintentional. When people cross paths, some sort of relating happens. My wife teaches her students, “We cannot not communicate”. And this communicative experience will naturally establish itself in some kind of rule-enforcing political form (totalitarian, democratic, etc.), for better or worse. And these rules, if broken, are intended to guarantee negative consequences for those who break them. But if the rules are followed, the collective demonstrates an act of reciprocal altruism, however imperfect it may be. And naturally, within this collective, sub-groups develop of people establishing more of these social contracts although with a lesser legalistic nature.
Some might wonder, by using the word “concrete” do I think at some point in the future the moral standards will harden into an unchanging entity. First of all, and let me make this clear, I don’t accept notions of prophecy or fortune-telling. So I don’t know what the future will be for morality, but if at some point the moral standards are hardened concrete and are in need of having some ingredients added or subtracted in the mixture, there’s always room to revise the recipe, collect the edited list of ingredients, and make a similar but better concrete foundation to replace the one being stood on.
Also, some may ask, “Then the horrors of the past are justified because the morality of that day had yet to evolve?” I say, “No”. Whether they knew it was wrong or not, our human ancestors are responsible for their actions that we, today, consider to be ‘immoral’. Those actions and the motivations behind them may be understood to a certain degree, but I see no reason to ever justify them. “Then, where is justice for the victims of the past?” they ask. I say, “Just like morality, justice too is not absolute …it’s concrete.”
04.06.09
Touching, But Can’t Be Touched
I couldn’t tell you how many times, when I’ve talked about the lack of EVIDENCE for the supernatural, I’ve been given personal testimonies from people who think anecdotes should be more than enough for me to commit myself to THEIR belief in the supernatural (even though, the more personal testimonies gathered from people NOT sharing the same spiritual family, the more the contradictions among the testimonies).
Check out this video –>
03.24.09
…Pants On Fire!
It was more than 30 years ago that I started praying on my bed every night of my childhood…
“Now I lay me down to sleep,
I pray the Lord my soul to keep,
If I should die before I wake,
I pray the Lord my soul to take.
Amen.”
It was more than 25 years ago, while reading over, again and again and again…
“For God so loved the world,
That He gave His only begotten son,
That whosoever believeth in Him
Should not perish,
But have everlasting life.
John 3:16.”
…I cried through a prayer, thanking Jesus “for dying for my sins”.
It was more than 30 years ago that I started praying before every meal up until my late teens…
“Come Lord Jesus, be our guest,
Let this food to us be blessed.
Amen.”
During my teens my bed-time prayers became increasingly personal, expressing many of the thoughts some may write in a diary (or fear to). Many of those prayers were filled with emotional expressions like a warm smile or a flood of tears.
I was born into a family and culture that have been Christian for generations. I was not taught that I should skeptically look for empirical evidence of the existence of God. I was taught to develop critical arguments to defend the particular version of theology passed on to me from family, church, and Bible School. But questioning the existence of God or the bible as God’s revelation wasn’t a consideration. And while playing guitar and singing songs (some written by yours truly) in at least 4 Christian Rock bands across Canada and into Australia, I still never considered acknowledging the viewpoint of those who haven’t taken on the presupposition that God is real and he reveals it in his Son and the Spirit that worked through the Biblical writers.
After about the first 6 or 7 years of Bible College I came to an understanding that it is healthy to listen to everything others say with a skeptical mind in order to have an informed sense of trust or mistrust (or both) in what they say. After a summer of preaching, leading worship and youth groups at an average-sized church in Winnipeg, I continued to pursue a Master of Divinity. When my pride in my acquired seminary training in theology had somewhat subsided, I re-discovered that it was also healthy to be skeptical of my own assumptions – not just for intellectual growth, but also to benefit how I relate to others.
Just recently it has been suggested to me by someone who has known me (or at least about me) since I was born that either I’ve been lying throughout my two active (ie.blog) years as an atheist about being an atheist, convincing all those close to me..
OR
I lied throughout my 30+ years as a Christian about being a Christian, convincing all those close to me.
Maybe I lied about both! That’s right, folks! I am THAT good of a fraud! I have consistently fooled all those close to me through every word and action of mine concerning my heartfelt fundamental beliefs!
03.09.09
I’m Told I’m Still A Christian
I’ve been receiving some emails from someone I’ve known for a long time. I thought she knew that I wasn’t a Christian anymore, but it became unmistakably clear that this was not the case.
So, after the shock of reading in one of my emails “I’m an atheist,” there was an attempt to create a conversation that included an assumption about my professed lack of belief in ‘God’ – the assumption being that it’s “not possible” for me to lose my belief in God. And apparently, this blog you’re reading reveals that I’m just blaming God for something major that happened to me.
Here’s most of my latest response:
…If it’s not possible to you, then what more can I say? I’m not interested in trying to prove my own disbelief. I think if I say I’m not a Christian anymore, that should be enough for people to believe me.
…I don’t know how you got that out of my writings. You’ll have to point out where in my blog that I communicate this. And I’m troubled by this thought because the assumption here is that my non-belief is a purely psychological matter. That I don’t really believe that God doesn’t exist, I’m just mad at him. And any rationale I have for not believing should be discarded because it’s not Christianity that has failed me, it’s me that has failed God.
I thought ******’s testimony was interesting. Historicity is always difficult to address with ancient literature. The question of whether legend-making was involved is always present with every passage written and re-copied, translated and re-translated throughout the millenniums. I suppose, if God is real, it’s a shame he didn’t incarnate himself in this age where we can have empirical verification. For scientists, such as archeologists and anthropologists, the only thing consistent between the present and the past when studying the subject of powerful beings is the political influences found among man-made religions.
All present day “miracles” that are scientifically tested have been found to be hoaxes. And there is no sign of a supernatural “Spirit” working through it’s believers distinguishing them from other people. There has even been a test on the power of prayer and the results showed no difference beween people who prayed and those that don’t. So, my question is – what happened? We have religions in our present day just as there have been for millenniums. But there is no sign of the supernatural in our present day. If the supernatural is real, why only in the past? Did the supernatural realm and all the beings residing in it die? Or if a supernatural being(s) just decided to make their realm a private experience among individual believers across the globe, why? And why is it that no one can agree what the supernatural being(s) is like? Be it between different religions, different denominations, different churches/mosques/temples, different preachers/imams/rabbis, or different teachers of religious texts, no supernatural being(s) has made any effort to clarify once and for all the truth about the supernatural.
I’m worried that this email is going to come across as harsh because I decided to confront what troubles me. It’s just that I so badly want to deal with what is really going on. I don’t want to console myself with beliefs/worlds that are not real, beliefs/worlds that can be used to put off some harsh realities – like death, for instance. And if humanity isn’t in fact the center of the universe (literally or spiritually), I don’t want to fool myself in believing so — even if it would provide me with more good feelings about myself and the world I live in.
Now that I’ve given up a belief in the supernatural, I’ve discovered that there is plenty of purpose and meaning throughout my daily routines with family, friends or even people abroad. Life is filled with new wonders and beautiful discoveries without ‘God’. And we don’t need ‘God’ to experience reciprocal altruism. Everybody wants the good life, they just need to have the opportunity to know what it is and either receive it or learn to live it.
This is getting long so, I’ll end it here and hope that you’ll consider this email to be a good one.
Love,
Jerry
